Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Trump warns of ‘big problems’ if indicted, says he’d still run for office


Grim Reaper 6
 Share

Recommended Posts

Former president Donald Trump warned that if he were indicted on a charge of mishandling classified documents after leaving the White House, there would be “problems in this country the likes of which perhaps we’ve never seen before.”  Trump, speaking Thursday to conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt, added, “I don’t think the people of the United States would stand for it.” 

Hewitt, who is also a contributing columnist for The Washington Post, then noted that critics would describe the comment as inciting violence, and he asked Trump to respond to the claim. “That’s not inciting — I’m just saying what my opinion is. I don’t think the people of this country would stand for it,” Trump said.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-warns-of-big-problems-if-indicted-says-he-d-still-run-for-office/ar-AA11SeI9?ocid=EMMX&cvid=d2f34058cb8244a9af7f0834f1b16f5b

  • Like 4
  • Haha 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Grim Reaper 6 said:

“That’s not inciting — I’m just saying what my opinion is. I don’t think the people of this country would stand for it,” Trump said.

Isn't this basically the stance that "DARK BRANDON" used after the backlash from his red speech about the "MAGA threat"?  I mean, the man and multiple voices on the Left and in their media have used very inflammatory language that could easily be called incitement.  So, one can foment such anger but all others cannot?  Uh, no... 

ETA:

The plan the Left seems to be executing will be to indict him and try him in DC so they can get a slam-dunk conviction.  THEN they will use their media arm to sell the case that he cannot legally run again.  Since the Constitution is very clear on the issue of qualifications for that job, no subsequent act of legislation can be used to disqualify a POTUS candidate from holding the office so at best, the case would be appealed and SCOTUS would make the ruling clear.  THEN the Left could use their media to inflame the public against SCOTUS as "rigged" or "fraudulent".

The point of all this is that yes, he CAN RUN AGAIN... and likely, he will.

Edited by and-then
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, and-then said:

Isn't this basically the stance that "DARK BRANDON" used after the backlash from his red speech about the "MAGA threat"?  I mean, the man and multiple voices on the Left and in their media have used very inflammatory language that could easily be called incitement.  So, one can foment such anger but all others cannot?  Uh, no... 

ETA:

The plan the Left seems to be executing will be to indict him and try him in DC so they can get a slam-dunk conviction.  THEN they will use their media arm to sell the case that he cannot legally run again.  Since the Constitution is very clear on the issue of qualifications for that job, no subsequent act of legislation can be used to disqualify a POTUS candidate from holding the office so at best, the case would be appealed and SCOTUS would make the ruling clear.  THEN the Left could use their media to inflame the public against SCOTUS as "rigged" or "fraudulent".

The point of all this is that yes, he CAN RUN AGAIN... and likely, he will.

I mean I hope he runs again. If he runs than Biden will win again.

If Trump can let go of his ego enough to let Desantis be the candidate than Desantis would win against Biden .

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, and-then said:

Isn't this basically the stance that "DARK BRANDON" used after the backlash from his red speech about the "MAGA threat"?  I mean, the man and multiple voices on the Left and in their media have used very inflammatory language that could easily be called incitement.  So, one can foment such anger but all others cannot?  Uh, no... 

ETA:

The plan the Left seems to be executing will be to indict him and try him in DC so they can get a slam-dunk conviction.  THEN they will use their media arm to sell the case that he cannot legally run again.  Since the Constitution is very clear on the issue of qualifications for that job, no subsequent act of legislation can be used to disqualify a POTUS candidate from holding the office so at best, the case would be appealed and SCOTUS would make the ruling clear.  THEN the Left could use their media to inflame the public against SCOTUS as "rigged" or "fraudulent".

The point of all this is that yes, he CAN RUN AGAIN... and likely, he will.

I personally believe his comments only hurt him at this point, It’s seems he has a problem with knowing what and what not to say. The only two things that can stop someone from from running for President is being convicted for being part of a rebellion or insurrection! Since he has been convicted of neither your right he could run again. The only thing I can see occur that would prevent him from running is a plea deal based upon others charges he may convicted of and only time will tell if that will occur. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am so over trumps boring bullying threats of what the American people will or will not stand for, according to his huge fragile ego.

He also brayed that in 2020 that if he lost for any reason and we saw his loyal bent knees parrot it and do nothing, okay they did bumbled up an attempted insurrection where one could almost hear the 3 stooges theme playing in the background.

When the FBI legally went to get evidence of crimes trump has commited from marlago trump brayed and a lone loon went to an FBI office and traded his life for a nail gun.

Ill guess that trumps lame threats of tantrums from his minions if he doesnt get his way is played out even to most of his worshippers afterall smitten goatboy is still in prison for following trumps braying.

Trump days of being above the law are behind him.

 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, and-then said:

Isn't this basically the stance that "DARK BRANDON" used after the backlash from his red speech about the "MAGA threat"?  I mean, the man and multiple voices on the Left and in their media have used very inflammatory language that could easily be called incitement.  So, one can foment such anger but all others cannot?  Uh, no...

I didn’t comment on this in my last post so I think I need to respond to it. Just because someone ( Biden ) makes some ridiculous comments  how does that justify what someone else did ( Trump ). Inflammatory language isn’t acceptable by any Politician and to make the statement above you appear to be justifying the comments made. You see this is big part of the problem that Americans across the board are making, these comparisons really serve no purpose because they certainly don’t make anyones comments justified. It would be great if we all could openly admit it when something is wrong, I have many faults but I do not deflect or try to justify foolish behavior. I think if we all could approach things from this perspective the ridiculous arguments that occur on this forum frequently could be avoided.

I am trying to change my personal approach to these discussions I hope others may possibly see some value in just being honest and admitting when something is wrong.

Oh and by the way this is a generalized statement that doesn’t apply to your comments alone, my comments are for anyone who chooses to use this approach and this forum it’s a very frequently used tactic. 

2 hours ago, and-then said:

ETA:

The plan the Left seems to be executing will be to indict him and try him in DC so they can get a slam-dunk conviction.  THEN they will use their media arm to sell the case that he cannot legally run again.  Since the Constitution is very clear on the issue of qualifications for that job, no subsequent act of legislation can be used to disqualify a POTUS candidate from holding the office so at best, the case would be appealed and SCOTUS would make the ruling clear.  THEN the Left could use their media to inflame the public against SCOTUS as "rigged" or "fraudulent".

The point of all this is that yes, he CAN RUN AGAIN... and likely, he will.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Grim Reaper 6 said:

The only two things that can stop someone from from running for President is being convicted for being part of a rebellion or insurrection!

Actually, according to our Constitution, the only disqualifying factors are to be impeached -and removed - OR to be convicted of the Constitutionally defined crime of Treason.  There are two aspects to that crime and he has committed neither.  BOTH involve taking up arms against the nation by raising forces or by rendering aid and comfort to those forces -WHO ARE AT WAR with the U.S.  

No amount of rhetorical flourish can meet those requirements.

https://constitution.findlaw.com/article3/annotation24.html

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artIII-S3-C1-1/ALDE_00001225/

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really hope he does run again.  Like @spartan max2, I think he will be defeated.  I hope it is not Biden, but we will see.  I think he will lose by a couple million bigger margin than 2020.  Maybe that will demonstrate that a majority of voters still distrust Trump to run the country.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If he runs, and the election is even close to fair, he wins in a landslide. The establishment has only magnified the reasons he was elected the first time. In economic times like these, it’s always the deciding factor. 

Edited by preacherman76
  • Haha 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, and-then said:

Actually, according to our Constitution, the only disqualifying factors are to be impeached -and removed - OR to be convicted of the Constitutionally defined crime of Treason.  There are two aspects to that crime and he has committed neither.  BOTH involve taking up arms against the nation by raising forces or by rendering aid and comfort to those forces -WHO ARE AT WAR with the U.S.  

No amount of rhetorical flourish can meet those requirements.

https://constitution.findlaw.com/article3/annotation24.html

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artIII-S3-C1-1/ALDE_00001225/

So I guess we are both right I should have included a source the first time.
 

Well here are two other crimes that will bar anyone from holding any office in the United States!

18 U.S. Code § 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2383

 

Fourteenth Amendment  Citizenship, Equal Protection, and Other Rights of Citizens

  • Section 3 Disqualification from Holding Office

    No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, and-then said:

Actually, according to our Constitution, the only disqualifying factors are to be impeached -and removed - OR to be convicted of the Constitutionally defined crime of Treason.  There are two aspects to that crime and he has committed neither.  BOTH involve taking up arms against the nation by raising forces or by rendering aid and comfort to those forces -WHO ARE AT WAR with the U.S.  

No amount of rhetorical flourish can meet those requirements.

https://constitution.findlaw.com/article3/annotation24.html

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artIII-S3-C1-1/ALDE_00001225/

Again where is it declared that treason automatically disqualifies one from becoming POTUS.

The 14th Amendment possibly disqualifies anyone from executive office if they've engaged in insurrection or rebellion?

Impeachment is the other process.

https://people.howstuffworks.com/criminal-conviction-bar-running-for-president.htm

Edited by Golden Duck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah GD, folks were just as confused when I told them he would win the first time. Didn’t make it any less so. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, preacherman76 said:

Yeah GD, folks were just as confused when I told them he would win the first time. Didn’t make it any less so. 

Everyone knew Trump was going to win, in 2016, after Comey reopened the investigation into HRC.  Your "prediction" was just back ground noise.  Despite Comey, it still wasn't a landslide by anything other than the most unorthodox definition of the word.

As for the fair election fairy tale, Trump Cultists have been been able to put exactly zero runs on the board.  In fact, they haven't even managed a single hit.

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, preacherman76 said:

If he runs, and the election is even close to fair, he wins in a landslide. The establishment has only magnified the reasons he was elected the first time. In economic times like these, it’s always the he deciding factor. 

Yes economics certainly play a role in any election but I suspect the rest of this may be beyond you. But the reason he won the first time was because he received the majority of the Evangelical Christian vote that Pence brought to the table now I don’t know where that stands today. But in 2020 that percentage dropped no only for Evangelicals but also for all Christian voters, is that why he lost I can’t say, but it certainly hurt him.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

Everyone knew Trump was going to win, in 2016

Trump was paying $5 at the bookies the night before the 2016 election.  Clinton was an almost unbackable bookies favourite.  

If everyone knew,  why the bookies odds?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I understand there are still investigations that are desired about the nuclear dealings with the former President. These circle around the 666 5th Avenue New York building, Trump's son-in-law Kusner's 'Abraham Accord' deal with the Middle East, and selling our nuclear power plants to Saudi Arabia to fund it. The same threat is also on the left though. It's prophetically bizarre.

As cool as the Jan 6th riot was. I guess it's up to Congress to decide if it was sedition. I think it's just trying to stop it wherever possible. 

The threats against the FBI are also upsetting. The FBI is out saving lives and then getting attacked by the administration. Criminals always start to hate the police because they are after them. That's what I have thought was actually going on for some time....

Anyway there is a lot of shady things going on behind the scenes, but the left hand isn't exactly clean either.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Paranoid Android said:

Trump was paying $5 at the bookies the night before the 2016 election.  Clinton was an almost unbackable bookies favourite.  

If everyone knew,  why the bookies odds?

Because bookmakers manage the risk they are holding.  Large bets skew that risk.  Large bets also reduce the number of people being polled.  To dumb it down dollars don’t get to vote.

Also how much money was wagered before Comey?

However, the betting market isn't germane to this sub-thread.

Ol' mate, "Leyland" asserted he told an unknown cohort of "folks."  However, in this forum, after Comey's announcement, even Captain Risky was calling him "The Kingmaker."

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

If he runs, and the election is even close to fair, he wins in a landslide. The establishment has only magnified the reasons he was elected the first time. In economic times like these, it’s always the deciding factor. 

Greetings,

Donald Trump received a lot of support by people who believed he was a viable alternative.  For many, he proved not to be.   A lot of people just want to go to work, feed their families, have a little bit of security  for their old age, and a little bit of fun in their leisure time.  Over four years, many decided he provided no useful alternative.  As he goes deeper and deeper into Q-Anon  rhetoric he turns more people off.  Middle of the road people are starting to think he is  unhinged and useless, not a viable leader for the US.

Donald Trump lost the popular vote in 2016.  He lost the popular vote in 2020.  He will lose the popular vote in 2024 if he runs.  No landslides.

The problems still exist, but it becomes clear to more people that Donald Trump is not a solution. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

After a slight recovery in the last couple of weeks of Biden in the polls (which was still very low) his popularity is once again plummeting lol.

I think it might have been his Hitler style dark and sinister speech that put people off.

Edited by Cookie Monster
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Grim Reaper 6 said:

Former president Donald Trump warned that if he were indicted on a charge of mishandling classified documents after leaving the White House, there would be “problems in this country the likes of which perhaps we’ve never seen before.”  Trump, speaking Thursday to conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt, added, “I don’t think the people of the United States would stand for it.” 

Hewitt, who is also a contributing columnist for The Washington Post, then noted that critics would describe the comment as inciting violence, and he asked Trump to respond to the claim. “That’s not inciting — I’m just saying what my opinion is. I don’t think the people of this country would stand for it,” Trump said.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-warns-of-big-problems-if-indicted-says-he-d-still-run-for-office/ar-AA11SeI9?ocid=EMMX&cvid=d2f34058cb8244a9af7f0834f1b16f5b

Does the US not have laws against subverting democracy?

If so, a complaint should be made to the police that Biden is attempting to do that by having the FBI raid Trumps home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, spartan max2 said:

I mean I hope he runs again. If he runs than Biden will win again.

If Trump can let go of his ego enough to let Desantis be the candidate than Desantis would win against Biden .

Neither Trump or Biden will be running in 2024.   And at this point it is my opinion that the democrats could run a dark horse no one has ever heard of and beat the republican candidate, whether it is DeSantis or Pence.

Edited by Desertrat56
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Cookie Monster said:

Does the US not have laws against subverting democracy?

If so, a complaint should be made to the police that Biden is attempting to do that by having the FBI raid Trumps home.

Yes they do and because so many have complained then testified, Donald Trump and his inner circle are being investigated from many different areas. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Grim Reaper 6 said:

I personally believe his comments only hurt him at this point, It’s seems he has a problem with knowing what and what not to say. The only two things that can stop someone from from running for President is being convicted for being part of a rebellion or insurrection! Since he has been convicted of neither your right he could run again. The only thing I can see occur that would prevent him from running is a plea deal based upon others charges he may convicted of and only time will tell if that will occur. 

The real thing that will keep him from running is that he has no one to foot the bill for a campaign.  Right now he is getting a lot of free publicity from the media and in his media personality mindset, that is all he needs, but in reality is it not.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

Yes they do and because so many have complained then testified, Donald Trump and his inner circle are being investigated from many different areas. 

There has been no criminal trial where people have testified.

There was a political hearing, that`s not the same thing, no political hearing I have ever watched on any issue was free from people playing politics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Desertrat56 said:

Neither Trump or Biden will be running in 2024.   

I do hope Biden does not run.  Even members of his party are saying it is time for a fresh new generation of leaders.  Time for Nancy Pelosi to take the hint too.  There are plenty of people 50 and under who are talented and more in tune with the world and society that the 70+ crowd.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.